Intel Has a Competitor for the AMD ThreadRipper [Rumor]

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by cageymaru, May 29, 2017.

  1. cageymaru

    cageymaru [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    19,814
    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2003
    Intel is not a company to be outdone by a competitor. They have pride in their product lineup even though it did seem a tad stale the last few iterations. If this Intel Core i9-7980XE 18C/36T rumor is true, it seems that they have an AMD ThreadRipper competitor waiting in the wings! A little birdie has leaked a X299 product lineup to VideoCardz. Remember that this is a rumor so take it with a grain of salt as usual. Having true competition in the CPU space sure is fun again!

    AMD’s Threadripper will face more powerful competition that we first thought. A 18-core processor called Core i9-7980XE will be Intel’s flagship model of Core-X series.
     
  2. Mut1ny

    Mut1ny [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,854
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2013
    Yeah cool. And, uh, how many multiple times more will it cost? Exactly.

    I'm loving this "Intel has competition" thing...Core i9...like this would be happening had AMD not come from left field with some incredible hardware.

    Look at Intel stressin'!
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2017
  3. vegeta535

    vegeta535 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,248
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2013
    Only your 1st born for the 16 core. Your 2nd and 3rd for the 18 core.
     
    Vercinaigh and gigatexal like this.
  4. Jim Kim

    Jim Kim 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,500
    Joined:
    May 24, 2012
    A wise man once said, "If you have to ask, you can't afford it."
     
    Nokia, Tych-0, GoldenTiger and 4 others like this.
  5. DeathFromBelow

    DeathFromBelow [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,251
    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2005
    These chips aren't a total joke like the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition was, but they'll be too expensive to matter.
     
  6. Nenu

    Nenu [H]ardened

    Messages:
    18,885
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    It needs to be demonstrated that what we have already isnt enough.
     
    britjh22 likes this.
  7. NeoNemesis

    NeoNemesis 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,385
    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Whatever it costs, it costs a lot less than it would have if AMD hadn't come along.
     
  8. vegeta535

    vegeta535 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,248
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2013
    It would cost nothing actually. Cause Intel wouldn't released these then lol.
     
    N4CR likes this.
  9. M76

    M76 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,461
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Competitor would suggest it is a competitor in price as well. And more importantly bang for buck.
     
  10. vegeta535

    vegeta535 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,248
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2013
    These will crush anything AMD will release performance wise. AMD will crush Intel on price/performance tho.
     
  11. viscountalpha

    viscountalpha 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,545
    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2011

    That's an arrogant way to take it. The richest people are usually the ones that penny pinch the hardest.
     
    Nihilus1 and Nolan7689 like this.
  12. azuza001

    azuza001 Gawd

    Messages:
    692
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2012
    If it costs more than a 1080ti it's already lost. Just saying.
     
    DrezKill and Vercinaigh like this.
  13. gtrguy

    gtrguy Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    145
    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Whut? LOL
     
  14. Brian_B

    Brian_B 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,310
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    That is costs more is all but guaranteed - you can't even buy a new 8-core Intel for the price of a 1080Ti today.

    Also, what does CPU price have to do with GPU price? The people who will be buying these 18-core chips are probably not going to be gamers. Games today still can barely take advantage of 4 cores, and the fastest gaming CPUs are still 4C/8T despite 6 & 8 (and more) cores being available for many years now.
     
    Nihilus1 likes this.
  15. oldmanbal

    oldmanbal [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    2,042
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    I don't see how they are going to be pricing any of these remotely competitive without destroying their mid range market.
     
  16. andrewaggb

    andrewaggb Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    436
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    I wonder that too. And I'm guessing no ECC support or Xeon features.
     
  17. Cha0s

    Cha0s n00b

    Messages:
    24
    Joined:
    May 6, 2017
  18. Taldren

    Taldren Gawd

    Messages:
    520
    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Yeah, so, AMD breaks out the Infinity Tape and tacks on a couple more CCX to a Threadripper ... tada. This isn't a fight Intel is going to win with its current legacy implementation. AMD can far more easily just keep adding cores while maintaining the per core frequencies ... unlike Intel.

    Speaking of Infinity Fabric, since Vega is being made to utilize it , how many Vega cores do you think AMD can add to a single card? Would they show as a single GPU rather than multiple?
     
  19. azuza001

    azuza001 Gawd

    Messages:
    692
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2012
    I was just using the Ti as a base price point. And you can get an 8 core - 16 thread for under that from amd now, I am pretty sure threadripper will still be under 800$

    Finally I am a gamer and if it was affordable I would get the extra cores just because I could, but I wont spend more on my cpu than my gpu.
     
    Brian_B likes this.
  20. gxp500

    gxp500 Gawd

    Messages:
    865
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2015
    And amd also has the 32 core naples chip as a competitor...
     
    Quartz-1 likes this.
  21. Teenyman45

    Teenyman45 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,325
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    Intel's been able to churn out Xeons with these numbers of proposed cores for a while now right? How hard would it really be for Intel to keep up the "de-featuring" of the Xeons, unlock the multiplier, and use a HEDT socket and pin count?
     
    jaffy likes this.
  22. Makaveli@BETA

    Makaveli@BETA 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,304
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2004
    I asked a rich guy about this and he said that's how you stay rich and why lotto winners are broke in 5 years after winning.
     
  23. Quartz-1

    Quartz-1 [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,257
    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Why is it news that Intel has a competitor to Threadripper? They've had several for yonks in the Xeons. All they have to do is disable ECC RAM support.
     
  24. Criticalhitkoala

    Criticalhitkoala [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,678
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2015
    Because people have short term memory and they forget that one above average launch for AMD all of a sudden makes AMD wonderful again despite the repeated years of AMD shitting on all their supporters :)
     
  25. Trimlock

    Trimlock [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,157
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    I have a hard time believing anything Intel is releasing is due to what AMD is doing. Most of their stuff is in the pipeline way in advance (same for AMD) so I highly doubt this has anything to do with the thread ripper.

    If Intel adjusted prices then I would believe they were reacting to AMD, but they haven't done that either.
     
  26. vegeta535

    vegeta535 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,248
    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2013
    II believe Intel has moved up their time line because of AMD but I don't believe they will competitive price wise. Intel doesn't want to devalue their brand. Intel can still say they have the best processor but it will cost you to get it like it has been for years.
     
  27. Filiprino

    Filiprino Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    253
    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2011
    Threadripper maintains same clock speeds as Ryzen. Intel has to lower clocks and the extra cores increases their latency. 18 cores in Intel's HEDT was not planned. At most 12 cores. 14, 16 and 18 have not been leaked before. They are releasing these chips in response to AMD.
    AMD is still the better chip.
     
    N4CR likes this.
  28. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    21,511
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    the question really comes down to whether intel prices themselves outside of the competition.. given intel's history with the extreme processors even when amd was competitive at the times of their release intel will price them off their brand which means they really only exist for intel to say they have the best but no sane person will actually buy them.


    i agree to an extent, i believe the tech was in the pipeline for intel but was intended for the server market. but i also think ryzen being competitive pushed up their release timelines given how quickly intel rushed to publicly announce processors years in advance leading up to ryzens release which is something intel usually doesn't do.
     
    Last edited: May 29, 2017
    Quartz-1 likes this.
  29. Brian_B

    Brian_B 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,310
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    I agree with this, Intel may not have necessarily had 12-18C chips lined up for the HEPT lineup, but it wasn't a far stretch for them to do so given their current Xeon lineup.

    Even when it was Athlon versus P3/P4, and AMD had all the advantages (except production capability), Intel still charged a premium for their brand name. They just threw a lot more money into marketing (Blue Man Group, etc).
     
  30. grtitan

    grtitan Telemetry is Spying on ME!

    Messages:
    1,266
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Try illegally blocking AMD at the OEM level:

    https://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/139521,intel-guilty-of-bullying-amd.aspx

    https://www.pcper.com/news/General-...US-Federal-District-Court-Antitrust-Complaint

    http://www.anandtech.com/show/3203

    I dont care if what they release is at the same price of AMD or cheaper, I will still give my money to AMD, because for now, Intel has proven that they can hold the market back and rape their customers if they are the only game in town.
     
    Snowdensjacket likes this.
  31. Dan_D

    Dan_D [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    54,636
    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2002
    Intel has 22c/44t parts already with better IPC today. That's more than enough for the desktop and HEDT segments. Neither can sell parts with that many cores at prices that anyone who plays games and dabbles in VMs can likely afford.
     
  32. geok1ng

    geok1ng 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,132
    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    one can still find brand new 4p opterons mobos on Amazon and supermicro, and they are more or less inside the budget of [H]ard users. A few years ago i payed $500 for a bundle of 10 ES 16C Interlagos Opterons. Sure, they become a furnace when OCed above 2.8GHz but G34 was very cheap, could take a ton of memory and run 64 real cores for less than $1000. the OC BIOS mod made G34 viable for quite a long time.

    looking at threadripper and naples die shots i remember the whole Opteron 6*** plan:
    a 4 socket CPU without a price premium
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2017
  33. tygrus

    tygrus n00b

    Messages:
    15
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2005
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadwell_(microarchitecture)
    Existing Broadwell Xeon
    Xeon 2697v4 18core, base 2.3 GHz, turbo 3.6 GHz, cache 45 MB, 145 W, $2702.
    With a 165w version you could add 0.2GHz to the base and maybe 0.3GHz to the max turbo.
    A Skylake version with mature 14nm could add a few 0.1GHz for the same power. Intel could pull a rabbit out of the hat and offer a 1 core turbo speed over 4GHz.
    http://wccftech.com/intel-x299-skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-z370-coffee-lake-s-z390-cannonlake-cpu-details/

    http://wccftech.com/amd-threadripper-1998x-and-threadripper-1998-processors-x399-x390/
    Threadripper is aiming for base 3.5GHz, turbo 3.9GHz.
    1998X, 16 cores, 3.5/3.9GHz, 155W.

    AMD should reduce the model numbers to give themselves more headroom for upgraded models to add on top.

    Intel's single core advantage is less noticed with these core counts. Overall RAM bandwidth and cache efficiency with high multi-thread activity is critical.
    AMD were core for core, GHz for GHz competitive, I'd be happy with a cheaper AMD system instead of Intel extortion.
     
    Last edited: May 29, 2017
  34. grtitan

    grtitan Telemetry is Spying on ME!

    Messages:
    1,266
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2011
    Sadly, fanbois would never get that and keep buying intel. Even though, when overall performance is currently better on amd due to more cores.
     
  35. Trimlock

    Trimlock [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    15,157
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    I agree with both of you that Intel could be releasing this earlier to compete with AMD's offering.
     
  36. Hagrid

    Hagrid [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    8,454
    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2006
    So an 8 core is 1000. A 10 core is 1500?
    So how much would this be?
     
  37. sirmonkey1985

    sirmonkey1985 [H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010

    Messages:
    21,511
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2008
    agree, this is more of a dick measuring competition at this point but i think in the long run it'll work out for everyone.. intel has been dead set on not going over 4c/8t for the affordable consumer side for far to long.. hopefully with this push that finally ends. so while it might not matter now, it could play a part in what happens with the next gen parts from intel.
     
    Chimpee likes this.
  38. Tych-0

    Tych-0 Gawd

    Messages:
    544
    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2010
    Perhaps this will finally push game producers towards taking advantage of more cores?
     
  39. cyclone3d

    cyclone3d [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,063
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    But what if I ask what the price is before I buy anything at all?

    Deciding to buy something before you even know the price is just plain stupid.
     
    JustReason likes this.
  40. Saki630

    Saki630 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    330
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    I can afford these babies considering I have an i7920! Do people believe amd can compete?

    I'm hoping on 8core with a 1080ti :)